If Shotcut could have used 65% of the GPU, rather than 12% it would have done the encoding faster than CapCut 47s X 12 / 65 = about 10s.
I suspect that CapCut uses the GPU heavily for filters too, while Shotcut doe not (normally) use the GPU-based filters). The main difference between CapCut and Shotcut is the use of the GPU (65% vs 12%-15%). | | Av Bit-rate | Av Bit-rate | Av Bit-rate | Qual=55% | Qual=55% | | | | Hardware | Software | Hardware | Software |
In both cases the same file size + encoding time.ĬapCut is developed by ByteDance, a company with 130,000 employees and a revenue of $60Billion per annum. In Shotcut (win64-221221 portable) it makes no difference whether I switch on hardware or software encoding. How can this serious difference in encoding time occur? Shotcut = creates 125 MB file in 14 minutes ( 840 seconds).ĬapCut = creates 129 MB file in 45 seconds.Īll exported films look the same in terms of quality. Time of export directly one after the other (Shorcut, CapCut, VSDC then for comparison CapCut, VSDC, Shotcut).Settings for the export (codecs 5 mbit Hardwareenc).Filters (4 x text, all clips enlargement 110% no rotation, 1 clip slow motion).I have created 1 identical project each with Shotcut, CapCut, VSDC Pro. I know that there have already been many discussions about exports, but I cannot explain the following difference:
0 kommentar(er)
